Accused: Mo's Story - BBC1 - Tuesday 21st August 2012

(Rated 5/5 )

Heart-rippingly powerful drama that had me bawling my eyes out at the intense pain of the situation created by genius writer Jimmy McGovern and co-writer Carol Cullington about two mothers, played by Anne-Marie Duff (Mo) and Olivia Colman (Sue)... and their sons, living in the now depressingly common world of gangs and gun crime.

I foolishly gave last week's episode 5/5, giving myself no room for an improved score... on that basis this should be 7/5... Last week Sean Bean's performance really impressed, and the rest of the drama was good but not great... This week's performances were outstandingly and poignantly emotion-stirring and the twists and turns of the plot superb too. What is so shocking is this is real! This is happening in places around our whole country.

Such tight and well-constructed drama and several surprises, so it is hard and maybe a shame to say much about it. Anne-Marie Duff's and Olivia Colman's characters are very close friends, who work together in a hairdresser's and take a stand against bullying youths, who have dictated that shops be closed... and so the consequences...

Anne-Marie Duff is supremely sensitive in her acting. This small actor has an almost incongruently huge strength of expression and humanity. Olivia Colman, Ruth Sheen (Mo's mother) and Thomas Brodie Sangster are totally believable also - we feel their pain. And this is pain in abundance, but even within that there are some good laughs.

Outstanding to develop such compelling characters in just an hour such that we truly know and feel them. And a cleverly enmeshed plot to put them in the worst plight possible!

Accused: Mo's Story – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

Accused: Tracie's Story - BBC1 - Tuesday 14th August 2012

(Rated 5/5 )

Jimmy McGovern's drama series Accused, that tells the stories which lead up to the accused characters we see on trial, is back. And my goodness this is such high class T

V, though I hope Jimmy wouldn't mind me referring to it that way as someone who writes about those real, unprivileged people from lower classes, iin such challenging moral positions. Do we agree with the verdict both legally and morally? What would we do in their shoes? (Or in Sean Bean's case, would we wear those stilletos?!)

Sean Bean is exceptional both as the 'boring' English literature teacher Simon, and his transvestite alter-ego Tracie, in whose glittering frocks he/she comes alive. He is deliciously camp, smart and tough as Tracie, yet also so vulnerable, sensitive, understanding - counselling his bedfellows, emotionally intelligent and demands our empathy. This is the best I have ever seen Sean Bean. His Simon is nice and normal - un-colourful, and yet for me highly noticeable and compassion-inducing. The quotes he teaches from the classics fit so well with the story and drama!

Stephen Graham, as his lover, does an excellent job too.

The piece deals with homophobia and bigotry against transvestites, self-identity, sexual-identity, love of self and others, trying to be 'normal' when you are 'out of the ordinary', and really challenges us to think about all these issues in our own lives and perhaps contemplate our own sexualities.

Dealing with all that would be enough, but a murder occurs as a consequence of Sean's and Stephen's characters liason and it is that for which Simon finds himself in the dock.

As usual Jimmy's writing really delivers. The piece is crisp, sharp (no pun intended), real, natural and unafraid to take risks or shock. In a strange way, though, I think in the way Jimmy brings things out, even shocking things do not shock us. He helps us accept what is and challenge what is wrong in society and our lives.

Accused: Tracie's Story – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview
Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘Melancholia’ - DVD watched… Thursday 26th July 2012

(Rated 4/5 )

Billed as a psychological disaster movie, this is the self-admitted melancholic Lars von Trier at his best. The visual imagery is stunningly beautiful and extraordinary. Really riveting! The film opens with a sequence of slow-motion snippets from the film, so powerful it’s hard to blink even! And hints at what we are to expect.

And then flows into normal motion and sequences of highly natural acting and direction. To me this felt like a documentary – really like the camera discovered scenes that mattered to best show us who and how these characters are, and how they interact with each other, and recorded them for us.

Kirsten Dunst and Charlotte Gainsbourg play sisters, Justine and Claire, and the story is told in two parts; the first more from Justine’s POV and the second from Claire’s. The melancholic Justine is getting married and attempting to live a ‘normal’ life. Claire does her very best to try to make everything work for Justine, but in a way with all her fixing makes matters worse. We get an excellent insight into Justine’s psychology through witnessing her family’s behaviour at the wedding and how she responds to it. The camera sees into her soul via her eyes and body language.

Then, in a slightly bizarre twist we see how Claire and Justine handle the prospect of the planet Melancholia on a possible course towards an impact with earth. So much metaphor at work here! But also questions as to who is more able to handle real impending catastrophe – the sister with self-created anxieties and distress, or the more positive and apparently capable one.

A wealth of great names inhabit the characters in this film, but the core and heart of the acting and emotion come from Kirsten and Charlotte. They are superb and so revealing of their characters and the subtle twists and turns of the relationship between them. All so beautifully and artistically exhibited in the direction. Amazing and wonderful as well as truthfully insightful and disturbing.

Melancholia – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview
Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘Richard III’- Part 2 - Shakespeare’s Globe - Thursday 19th July 2012

(Rated 4/5 )

As promised, I am revisiting my experience of this production of Richard III. I wanted to say more and didn't feel I had the time and energy to do so, so here it is now... part 2.

As I've said before, I personally don't find this play that interesting aside from the character of Richard himself - or perhaps that should be multiple-characters/personalities of him - and how he became as he did. Unfortunately I didn't see Anthony Sher's portrayal of him, but Sher wrote a book on his experience and acting process during that time; Year of the King. Sher and his then psychotherapist, Monty Berman, analyse Richard and conclude that it all has to do with the fact he wasn't loved by his mother! That does come through in the play. And that he is bitter about his disability and the world owes him. And perhaps like Dexter (of TV fame, played by Michael C. Hall), and other psychopaths, once he has started killing he can't stop. In fact some of his arguments, though crazy, seem almost reasonable. Again, like Dexter Morgan, Richard Plantagenet confides in his audience a great deal, so we get a fascinating insight into the workings of his mind and plans - then to see them carried out and we can enjoy even more the horror and humour of his manipulations. And yet it is difficult to sympathise with him on the mother front - unlike Dexter, Richard's mother wasn't murdered horribly right in front of his young child's eyes and he doesn't take out his compulsion to kill on bad people - Richard's victims are innocents; amongst them women and children. Also, most disabled people don't go round murdering others. In fact of those I know, disability rather gives them a heightened compassion towards others and a strength in dealing with life's struggles. It does seem to be a well-used dramatic ploy for villainy though - other examples including The Phantom of the Opera and a few Bond villains!

This production was in traditional Shakespearean costume. I think that also helps us believe the men as women, in their skirts right down to the ground - they glide instead of walk along the stage. The young princes, played by Shanu Hazzan and Dylan Standen, looked just like little men in their royal garb. Very cute and I was very impressed by their delivery of Shakespeare's language as though it was the most natural way to speak in the world. 

The new Globe is a very special theatre. It has been reproduced as accurately to the original as possible within available knowledge. It has such an amazing atmosphere and you feel transported back in time. For someone with disability problems it is a little difficult. You are sitting on hard wooden benches with no support for the back - though you can hire cushions and fold up 'chair-backs'. Well that is of course if you are sitting at all! Many stand where stalls would normally be - great view but tough for a typically 3-hour long play. Actors and audience alike are open to the elements - best to take layers of clothing in case. That said, with the insistence on air conditioning in many closed theatres, it is often warmer in The Globe. I was far too cold in the Donmar on my last visit.

Really great job, and will be a great experience for anyone going instead of, or as well as a trip to the Olympics. For foreign visitors this troupe make Shakespeare easily understandable. I look forward to them, with the addition of Stephen Fry doing Twelth Night...

Richard III – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘The Hollow Crown: Henry V’ - BBC2 - Saturday 21st July 2012

(Rated 6/5)

And this time...
Better than perfect!!
Glorious, Highly Sensitive, Beautifully Moving, Tingling, Exciting, Inspiring, Uplifting, Heart-Wrenching and Tragically Sad. In fact I am welling up with tears of emotion as I write this. It may seem over-the-top to give it all those adjectives but - here's another one coming up - it really was the most exquisite production of this play that I have seen. And I do think Brannagh and Olivier's versions were excellent.

Hiddleston was convincingly different as now King Harry and gave an electric, yet emotional performance. He hit the mark absolutely, showing us just how much his character was feeling and yet not too much so as not to allow us the empathy to go through it all with him. He really was a King in mind AND heart. 
I had goosebumps galore! Especially in his:-
"We few, we happy few, we merry band of brothers..." speech. I would have willingly fought alongside him and I'm hardly equipped to do so!
Someone close to me commented how hard it was for the kings of that time - expected to constantly go to war and conquer this, that and the other country... as Harry says...
"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more...
Cry God for Harry, England and Saint George!"
In some ways it does seem a little bonkers. Constant conquering does not make a great country - looking to the needs of that country and nation does. Isn't it enough to rule just one? And really focus on looking after the citizens of that nation? 
But still provoked by a load of tennis balls from the Dauphin - harking back to Hal and his playing around - what is a King to do but conquer France? 
Harry V also refers back to Harry IV and wanting to make things right for his father.

Sir Richard Eyre presided over Henry IV and did a very good job. Taking charge and great care this time was theatre director Thea Sharrock. I really don't want to come across as biased, but the understandings and sensitivities of a woman enhanced this production in the extreme. There is no doubt at all this is one of Shakespeare's best plays, but work still has to be done in the interpretation and Sharrock brought out the absolute best in her actors. It is also a truly beautiful film. 
John Hurt lent his voice to the Chorus and truly brought out what seems to be Shakespeare's own feelings triggered as he went through the research and writing of the piece. And there were no weak links at all in the performing armour.

For lovers of Shakespeare and history this is a MUST-SEE! :)

The Hollow Crown: Henry V – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘Richard III’- Part 1 - Shakespeare’s Globe - Thursday 19th July 2012

(Rated 4/5 )

Ok, dear readers, no Shakespeare’s Richard III is NOT one of his 2-parters. However, my energy is restricted, such that I’m not sure I will be able to write all I want to say on Mark Rylance and The Globe company’s interpretation of this in one go. Yesterday involved a fair amount of moving around and it was all a bit too much for this body of mine. That plus the strange weather we’re having – just passably warmish then very cold wind and rain… lots of rain – it’s playing havoc with my ex-broken parts…

So enough moaning. We were very fortunate with the weather in the end last night. No rain and not too cold. So thankfully not Richard III within The Tempest!

And here I am complaining about my restricted body whilst Mark Rylance keeps putting his well-able body under the strain of being disabled – his Richard with a limp refreshingly different to the one he used for Jerusalem, and all hunched up and small compared to that other role for which he puffed himself up and became so famous and rightly highly-celebrated. And from the word go Mark injected his supreme talent into Richard. He was a funny Richard, even a strangely gentle psychopath, sensitive and gloriously charmingly manipulative, then dangerously brutal – making this a black comedy version, yet still dramatic and somehow not farcical. He was believable in his transitions from one way of being to the other, and had us really thinking about why and how this character – and I say character given the real Richard III had such bad press and was not a psychopath – became who and how he did.

As far as I recall I have only seen this play once before. That time it was Kevin Spacey playing an apparently far more serious and unsympathetic persona and I didn’t understand the plot, lost track of the Queens and felt bored. We were too high up to really see facial expressions though and when Kevin’s face loomed large on a screen it did get a lot more interesting and the charming psychopath was well visible. I looked up the plot before I went this time. In essence Richard kills lots of people to get the crown, and is then killed himself. The End. And when he is not on stage, for me it is a pretty boring play. What makes it interesting, or not, is how the actor chooses to embody Richard. And then how he interacts with the other characters…

In this production everyone is played by men, back to the tradition of Shakespeare’s time. And I was actually surprised that I was having to remind myself of that when the Queens – as in royal not gay; though they may be that too! – were performing. They were all superb, but particularly Samuel Barnett as Queen Elizabeth.

And once the play has ended and the epilogue has kindly informed us what happens next in the ‘real’ history, the original tradition of dancing and prancing around is also revived within the replica of Shakespeare’s own Globe Theatre and up gets Mark as himself and joins in. We are all reassured this was only a play and nobody is actually dead!

Richard III – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

‘Blackout’ - BBC1 - Monday 16th July 2012

(Rated 3just/5)

I was hoping things would improve for the final episode but the hoped for complications and twists didn't materialise. Instead confusion reigns. Either what happened is very simple or I'm missing something. Again, this is a case of me longing to love something but feeling let down. I wanted to be on the edge of my seat. I wanted to feel with and for the characters. The actors acted their socks off with a script, which I do think contained some important concerns about the nature of government and mayoral office today - exploring lies we are told and how would it be if someone in that position of power was genuine and wanted to do good? All that is interesting and important and credit to the team for that. But wish we'd been shown more than told! It could have become a cult classic.

Oh and apparently the therapy (of which we had more) wasn't really therapy, which is a relief as it was full of cliches and far too quick recoveries and fixes. Reminds me of the nature of the most popular therapy used by the NHS today! Maybe again showing us a system that simply doesn't work. If that was deliberate then well done :)

I'm so sorry but for me too superficial to be very good and a poor relation to The Shadow Line.

Blackout – Review by TheRestrictedReviewer © 2012

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview